Hey guys, alright I'm going to get straight to the point, bought a new 120gb WD Green ssd & it's performing like garbage. 99% disk usage half the time under task manager & some apps take a while to install.

However you won't get much joy out of that drive regardless - not only is that a DRAM-less controller but the small capacity means the SLC buffer gets filled very quickly. 120GB drives just don't have enough physical NAND dies present to allow the parallelism that makes SSDs fast, which is why 240GB is kinda the minimum size I'd recommend.

That said, as per @lexluthermiester the Blue version of this drive will give you a lot more joy if 120GB is the capacity you need.

However you won't get much joy out of that drive regardless - not only is that a DRAM-less controller but the small capacity means the SLC buffer gets filled very quickly. 120GB drives just don't have enough physical NAND dies present to allow the parallelism that makes SSDs fast, which is why 240GB is kinda the minimum size I'd recommend.

That said, as per @lexluthermiester the Blue version of this drive will give you a lot more joy if 120GB is the capacity you need.

New Member

Hey guys, alright I'm going to get straight to the point, bought a new 120gb WD Green ssd & it's performing like garbage. 99% disk usage half the time under task manager & some apps take a while to install.

Think that's a tad worse than I've seen this model perform but it's in the same ballpark.
You see; WD first came out with a WD Green which used 15nm 2D TLC NAND combined with a DRAMless controller from Silicon Motion (SM2258XT) and...well it is not a very impressive drive.
However WD updated the WD Green to use 3D TLC NAND with what looks to be a rebranded controller from Phison usually used in USB flash drives with only a change in model number to indicate a change (new version is G2, old version G1) and its performance is even lower than the first revision.
Your drive is the second revision which explains the poor performance.

Think that's a tad worse than I've seen this model perform but it's in the same ballpark.
You see; WD first came out with a WD Green which used 15nm 2D TLC NAND combined with a DRAMless controller from Silicon Motion (SM2258XT) and...well it is not a very impressive drive.
However WD updated the WD Green to use 3D TLC NAND with what looks to be a rebranded controller from Phison usually used in USB flash drives with only a change in model number to indicate a change (new version is G2, old version G1) and its performance is even lower than the first revision.
Your drive is the second revision which explains the poor performance.

A few years ago WD did a switcheroo with their HDD, they renamed the super slow 5400 Green series to be Blue EZRZ, they like to trick consumers into buying their green junk. The previous Blue (EZEX) was faster than the Black.

Actually in an external drive just used for storage, the Green HDD’s are great, especially if you got a later model after the idle timer issue.

I use one for server OS backup, and another as main rig storage in an HDD enclosure. Neither has any sign of dying after 3 Years of continuous on, and SMART looks good. Whether they are trash or not really depends on if you use them in the proper role.

It's not you, it's the drive. WD has gone and change things around and the WD Green should be avoided at all cost from now on, if this review is anything to go by - https://www.nordichardware.se/test/test-wd-green-med-3d-nand-samre-an-forut.html?/inledning (apologies for it being in Swedish, but some Google translate and looking at the graphs should help).
It's technically a USB 3.0 drive with a SATA interface. It's one of the slowest SSDs they've ever tested, which speaks volume for how good it is. The summary calls the performance "lousy".

Both true and not.
Example:
I bought my dad a Patriot Blaze 60GB drive a couple of years ago. That drive is running on a SATA2 controller and pushes numbers better than this PoS (sorry Lionhart).
The capacity does matter, but if the controller and nand are crap... not even 1TB will help.

It's not you, it's the drive. WD has gone and change things around and the WD Green should be avoided at all cost from now on, if this review is anything to go by - https://www.nordichardware.se/test/test-wd-green-med-3d-nand-samre-an-forut.html?/inledning (apologies for it being in Swedish, but some Google translate and looking at the graphs should help).
It's technically a USB 3.0 drive with a SATA interface. It's one of the slowest SSDs they've ever tested, which speaks volume for how good it is. The summary calls the performance "lousy".

Both true and not.
Example:
I bought my dad a Patriot Blaze 60GB drive a couple of years ago. That drive is running on a SATA2 controller and pushes numbers better than this PoS (sorry Lionhart).
The capacity does matter, but if the controller and nand are crap... not even 1TB will help.